HARVARD & PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS

It is an oft-heard tale, the influence of academia--of Harvard--on Washington. Presidents and senators puzzling over difficult policy questions will call on the university's leading economists or political scientists. Candidates trying to pull off a win in November will gather a kitchen cabinet of trusted Harvard experts.

This election year, several Harvard professors and lecturers play important roles in the campaigns of all three major candidates.

Still, Dillon Professor of International Affairs Joseph S. Nye Jr.-- a man accused of building up thousands of frequent flyer miles on the Cambridge--Washington shuttle--cautions against assigning too much importance to the influence of Harvard, either at present or in the past.

"There's a tendency to over-exaggerate or over-dramatize" the University's role, Nye says. "I don't think Harvard as a whole matters."

But Nye admits to being at least informally involved in the 1992 contest. The international relations expert said he has sent a few memoranda to the Clinton campaign.

Nye's involvement is minor compared with Kennedy School Lecturer Robert B. Reich's efforts for the Clinton campaign.

Reich has been a friend of the Democratic nominee since both were Rhodes scholars at Oxford University.

Reich, author of The Work of Nations, is widely credited for developing much of Clinton's economic plan. In the days prior to the New Hampshire primary, Reich stumped for his candidate, mostly trying to convince the press corps that Clinton's economic proposals would be the most successful at lifting the financially troubled Granite State--and the nation--out of the recession.

Although no single Harvard scholar probably has as much of an impact on the Republican side as Reich has on the Democratic, in sheer numbers, Harvard has more links to the Bush administration According to Institute of Politics Director Charles T. Royer, several Kennedy School professors get regular calls from administration officials.

Roger B. Porter, formerly a Kennedy School professor, now works on domestic policy issues in the Bush administration. And spring IOP Fellow John Ellis, in addition to authoring a rejected plan for media election coverage, frequently shares ideas with Roger Ailes, formerly a key campaign official for Ellis uncle, George Bush. Ellis says that while Ailes is not on the Republican payroll, he enjoys sort of a "senior eminence" in the campaign.

And other bush administrators, including budget director Richard G. Darman '64, have attended the University and often return for advice and consultation. "There are people like Darman and others who are in and out of here and working in the administration," Royer says.

Harvard has had other effects on the political scene this year. The corner stone of the machine that will likely run the upstart campaign of Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot came together at Harvard.

Thomas W. Luce III, a longtime Perot associate and former Republican Texas Gubernatorial candidate, will probably play the role of campaign manager for Perot, who has not yet officially announced his candidacy. Luce was an IOP fellow in the fall of 1990 when he met James Squires, them a fellow at the Joan Shorenstein Barone Center for Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School. Luce asked Squires to come on board as Perot's press spokesperson.

But while political connections still exist, most Harvard affiliates say the association is not as strong today as it once was.

During World War II, President James Bryant Conant '14 spent so much time in Washington that he was forced to promote his dean of the Faculty to provost and put his in charge of the day-to day operations of the University.

According to Ellis. The heyday of Harvard influence in Washington was the presidency of John F. Kennedy '40 during the Kennedy era, the fabled Cambridge-Washington shuttle became famous for transporting Harvard's ideas to the halls of Congress and the White House.

"The New England academic community was plugged into Washington in a big, big way in the early and mid-1960s," Ellis says.

The most prominent Harvard professor who moved to the beltway during Kennedy's reign was McGeorge Bundy, who stepped down as dean of the Faculty of arts and Sciences to become national security adviser.

Many of the ties began to be severed, however, as the '60s drew to a close, Ellis says he believes that the widespread opposition in the academic community to American military involvement in Vietnam was the beginning of the end.

Ellis says he believed the election of Richard M. Nixon, followed by republican administrations in 20 of the last 24 years helped "cut Cambridge out of the inner circles of government,"

"Cambridge is a pretty liberal place, and these are pretty conservative administrations," Ellis says.

Still, the connections between Harvard and the administrations following Kennedy's were not completely broken. John H. Dunlop stepped down as dean of the Faculty to become Nixon's secretary of labor.

And while his days as a Harvard professor werelong behind Henry A. Kissinger '50 when he becamesecretary of state, his ties to the schoolremained.

In the Carter administration. Nye served asundersecretary of state, and under Ronald Reagan,Baker Professor of Economics Martin S. Feldstein'61 chaired the Council of Economic Advisers.

But Nye believes that time and the Harvardmystique have exaggerated the Cambridge-WashingtonLinks especially during the Kennedy-Johnson years.

"There's a lot of mythology about that. I thinkyou have to be careful to extract myth fromreality," Nye says. "Just the word 'Harvard ispart of the myth-making."

Still, not everyone is as willing to write offthe connection as a complete myth.

Departing Associate Professor of GovernmentMark A. Peterson, who teachers a course called"The American Presidency," argues that the shuttle"certainly continues to exist," although in aslightly different form.

Peterson himself has shuttled to the Capitolseveral times in the last year to testify onhealth reform before congressional committees.

"The modern government probably has a smallpercentage of people involved" in the shuttling,Peterson says. "That involvement has a muchgreater impact on government and policy optionsthan it has on the electoral process."

And all three of the experts agree thatHarvard's impact on the 1992 election will beminimal. Ellis thinks the reelection of his uncleis a foregone conclusion, seeing no other possibleoutcome given the mathematical possibilities ofthe Electorla College. And Nye and Peterson simplydon't think the advice of individuals from any oneinstitution can have a significant impact.

Peterson says very little affects the outcomeof an election besides the economy. peace or war,party popularity and the like. "Of all thepossible factors affecting the election of1992,...whatever happens at this institution, thatimpact is going to be way down," he says.

Part of the reason for the University's declinein influence is the growth of other sources ofpolitical clout. As public opinion polls play anincreasingly powerful role in shaping policy, themore abstract political prognostication ofacademia is forced to take a back seat.

The popularity of research institutions, or"think tanks" as they are commonly known, mightalso be blamed for the decrease in professorialpower. Still, Harvard professors are oftenintimately connected with these institutions.

The Brookings Institute, a think tank inWashington, D.C., employs as fellows and guestscholars several one time Harvard instructors,including the director of its economics programs,Henry Aaron, and guest scholar Lincoln Gordon '34,who was Ziegler professor of internationaleconomic relations from 1936 to 1961.

And Loeb Associate Professor of the SocialSciences Margaret Weir plans to leave Cambridgenext year to be a senior fellow in residence atthe institute.

The University exerts influence on nationalpolitics not just by sending its scholars toWashington but also by bringing Washington to itsscholars.

Every two years, the Institute of Politics runsa six-day training program for new members ofcongress.

"What we strive to do is help to better preparepeople," Royer says. "We try to get them to lookat the issues from a broader perspective."

Royer said it is "impossible to tell what kindof effect the training has on first-yearlegislators, but acknowledged that with theunusually large turnover he expects in Congressnext session--Royer predicts as many as 120 newmembers--the potential for impact on policy isgreat.

"It's just a big group of people." Royer says."It's going to have an effect."

Although the number of Harvard scholars in theupper echelons of the White House may not be aslarge as in the days of Kennedy, Harvard makes itsmark. Professors share insights with the nation'slawmakers, people associated with the Universitystill take part in campaigns and administrationsand Harvard faculty remain involved with nationalpolicy questions.

The shuttle between the Potomac and the Charlesstill exists, Royer says. It's just "not ascrowded."JAMES SQUIRES